Podcasting and Constructivism

Emerging technologies provide opportunities for instructor–student as well as student–student real-time and/or time-delayed collaboration. Increasingly, mobile learning (also known as m-learning) is being used by students because it is portable and can be used in their own time frame (Ormond , 2008, Abstract). "Podcasting's essence is about creating content (audio or video – vodcasts) for an audience that wants to listen when they want, where they want, and how they want" (Boulous et al , 2006, p.3). Podcasting can be highly collaborative, student-centered learning and can be said to follow the constructivist theory of learning.

Today's students are characterized as social, highly competent multitaskers, who expect immediate results and feedback and seek stimulation and interaction (French ,2006, p.1). Cell phones, computers, and devices such as iPods are now fixtures in our culture, particularly for youth. The use of podcasting can leverage this for learning opportunities. Listening to audio books, recorded conversations, lectures, is becoming a more and more interesting way of usefully spending time when commuting or when you are traveling (Stanley , 2006, What is Podcasting section, ¶ 2) .

Apart from listening, it is also possible to use podcasts to extend the scope of the classroom by involving students in the creation and publishing of their own content for a real audience. New models of teaching may take advantage of RSS technology to deliver up-to-the-minute expert commentaries, for example, or to have students broadcast their analysis of topics studied (Beldarrian, 2006, p.141). Through the use of podcasting in classrooms, students can take ownership of their own learning, as well as become active participants. This is not just a passive participation but an active collaboration in both the preparation and the presentation (Holmes et al, Ideas into Practice section ¶ 4). These are all elements of a constructivist approach to learning. As Seitzinger (2006) argues, podcasting can facilitate key elements of constructive learning such as problem-based, collaborative learning and learner-centeredness (Seitzinger (2006), p.10).

Although podcasting is not necessarily a synchronous activity, it provides students with information that will help them feel connected to the learning community (Beldarrian, p.141). Students and teachers can post their podcasts to sites like Imeem, and Podomatic. As with other social software, podcasting has global potential. In other parts of the world where ubiquitous web access is just not possible podcasting and vodcasting removes the structured time component, and internet access is no longer required at the time you listen to or view the event (Ormond, 2008, Benefits section, ¶ 3).

Students’ interest is piqued when they realize the audience may be global. When work groups or a class work together to produce a Podcast, and this is published on the Web, the comments received can be just as powerful (Sietzinger, 2006, p.9) Not only can students construct their own knowledge via podcasting, but they can also "actively engage in the process of constructing knowledge for their learning community" (Holmes et al, 2001, Introduction section, ¶ 1).

Many students have been so busy memorizing what teachers tell them, they may need some support when they first attempt to communicate with others using collaborative technologies (Boulos et al, 2006, p.4). Podcasting will not replace the classroom experience, but does provide educators one more way to meet today’s students in their own environment, and use constructivist learning at the same time.



References

Beldarrain, Y. (2006). Distance education trends: Integrating new technologies to foster student interaction and collaboration. Distance Education, 27(2), 139-53. Retrieved February, 2009, from EBSCOhost.

Boulos, M.N.K., Maramba, I., & Wheeler, S. (2006). Wikis, blogs and podcasts: A new generation of Web-based tools for virtual collaborative clinical practice and education. BMC Medical Education, 6(41). Retrieved February, 2009, from http://www.biomedcentral.com/content/pdf/1472-6920-6-41.pdf


French, Donald P.(2006). iPods: Informative or Invasive? Journal of College Science Teaching, 36(1). Retrieved February, 2009, from WilsonWeb.

Holmes, B; Tangney, B; FitzGibbon, A.;Savage, T. and Mehan, S. (2001). Communal Constructivism: Students constructing learning for as well as with others. Technology And Teacher Education Annual, 2001.

Ormond, P. (2008). Podcasting enhances learning. Journal of Computing Sciences in Colleges, 24(1). Retrieved February 2009 from http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1409817


Seitzinger, J. (2006). Be constructive: Blogs, podcasts, and wikis as constructivist learning tools. Learning Solutions e-Magazine. Retrieved February, 2009, from
http://www.elearningguild.com/pdf/2/073106DES.pdf

Stanley, G. (2006). Podcasting: Audio on the Internet comes of age. TESL E-Journal, 9(4). Retrieved February 2009 from
http://www-writing.berkeley.edu/TESl-EJ/ej36/int.html

Social Bookmarking and Connectivism

This posting will attempt to serve as a critical reflection on the use of social bookmarking and how this relates the connectivism theory of learning. Connectivism is a “learning theory for the digital age” (Siemens ,2004, Connectivism section, ¶ 1). One of the key features of this new digital age is that it offers an ever-shifting blend of individualization and community involvement (Godwin-Jones , 2006, Delivery section, ¶ 5). Siemens expands on this and states that learning is a cycle of knowledge development between the individual and the network (online community). “This cycle of knowledge development (personal to network to organization) allows learners to remain current in their field through the connections they have formed” (Siemens, 2004, Connectivism section, ¶ 3). Basically, nurturing and maintaining connections is needed to facilitate continual learning. The process of social bookmarking lends itself very well to this theory.


Because each bookmarked page is linked to the person who bookmarked it, a user can discover how others have assessed that content, and find people with related interests. By doing this, connections are nurtured. Sites such as del.icio.us or citeulike allow users to assign labels known as tags to stored bookmarks which users can recall through searches on sets of tags. In a classroom setting, “students can learn from their teachers’ tagging strategies and teachers can view students’ tagging to better understand the premise of their work” (Alexander ,2006, Project section, ¶ 10). Using tags agreed upon by the class and the description field, students can “create their own research bank of related sites” (Bryant, 2006, Social Bookmarking section, ¶ 3). This ‘social tagging’ replaces traditional, externally imposed hierarchies of categorization (the taxonomy) with a process of content organization reflecting the interest of the group, known as a ‘folksonomy’ (Wheeler et al, 2006, Folksonomies section, ¶ 1).

The overwhelming volume of resources available on-line can make finding resources with high-quality content and features suitable to the K-12 environment nearly impossible (Carlson & Reidy, 2004, Abstract section, ¶1). One study of teachers found that 71% of respondents indicated that the top challenge they face in seeking in using Web-based resources was the great amount of time it takes to locate appropriate resources on-line (Carlson & Reidy, 2004, Section 4.4, ¶ 1). Social bookmarking makes this process easier, for both educators and students. New methods of finding and identifying Web resources involve fundamental skills of analysis, contextualization, and conceptualization, not to mention reading and writing themselves (Godwin-Jones, 2006, Discovery section, ¶ 1). Again, these are very relevant skills within the Connectivist theory. Examining the tags attached to movie files, digital photographs, and podcasts reveals potentially useful information about the way that others perceive these objects, questioning audience, literacy, and reception (Alexander , 2008, p. 156).

The potential of such tools is to support a closer relationship between students working together on a shared problem. Collaborative, personal tools can help create a shared frame of reference within a group (Daalsgard, 2006, Personal Tools section, ¶ 8). Organizing a personal tool (such as a bookmarking structure) can “promote self-governed and constructive processes” (Daalsgard, 2006, Personal Tools section, ¶ 8). This is obviously also in-line with the Constructivist theory of learning.

To conclude, the relatively new learning theory of Connectivism draws many parallels within the use of social bookmarking. As suggested by Siemens, knowing where to find information is more important than knowing information (Siemens, 2004, Connectivism section, ¶ 3). It may become less important to know and remember where information was found and more important to know how to retrieve it using a framework created by and shared with peers and colleagues (Lomas, 2005, Implications section, ¶ 1). This is key to understanding how connectivism relates to the idea of social bookmarking.

References

Alexander, Bryan (2008). Web 2.0 and Emergent Multiliteracies. Theory Into Practice, 47(2), p150-160. Retrieved February, 2009, from http://pdfserve.informaworld.com/161669_770885140_792189474.pdf

Alexander, Bryan (2006). Web 2.0: A new wave of innovation for teaching and learning?
Educause Review, 41(2). Retrieved February, 2009, from http://connect.educause.edu/Library/EDUCAUSE+Review/Web20ANewWaveofInnovation/40615

Bryant, Todd (2006). Social Software in Academia. Educause Quarterly, 29(2). Retrieved February, 2009, from http://connect.educause.edu/Library/EDUCAUSE+Quarterly/SocialSoftwareinAcademia/39976?time=1202994649


Carlson, B. & Reidy, S. (2004). Effective access: teachers’ use of digital resources. OCLC Systems & Services: International Digital Library Perspectives, 20(2). Retrieved February, 2009, from http://www.emeraldinsight.com/Insight/viewPDF.jsp?contentType=Article&Filename=html/Output/Published/EmeraldFullTextArticle/Pdf/1640200203.pdf

Dalsgaard, Christian (2006). Social software: E-learning beyond learning management systems. European Journal of Open and Distance Learning. Retreived February 2009 from http://www.eurodl.org/materials/contrib/2006/Christian_Dalsgaard.htm

Godwin-Jones, Robert (2006). Tag Clouds in the Blogosphere: Electronic Literacy and Social Networking. Language Learning & Technology, 10(2), p8-15. Retrieved February, 2009, from http://llt.msu.edu/vol10num2/pdf/emerging.pdf

Kesim, Eren; Agaoglu, Esmahan (2007). A Paradigm Shift in Distance Education: Web 2.0 and Social Software. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education (TOJDE), 8(3), p66-75. Retrieved February, 2009, from
http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICDocs/data/ericdocs2sql/content_storage_01/0000019b/80/34/eb/44.pdf

Lomas, C. (2005). 7 things you should know about Social Bookmarking. Educause, Learning Initiative. Retrieved February, 2009, from http://www.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/ELI7001.pdf

Siemens, George (2004). Connectivism: A Learning Theory for the Digital Age. Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning, 2(1). Retrieved February, 2009, from http://itdl.org/Journal/Jan_05/article01.htm

Wheeler, Steve; Yeomans, Peter; Wheeler, Dawn (2008). The good, the bad and the wiki: Evaluating student-generated content for collaborative learning. British Journal of Educational Technology, 39(6), p987-995. Retrieved February, 2009, from http://www.pgce.soton.ac.uk/ict/NewPGCE/Blog/The%20good%20the%20bad%20and%20the%20wiki

Blogs and Communities of Practice

With the flourishing of social networking online, there has been much more interest as of late in the “communities of practice” learning theory. Etienne Wenger defines Communities of Practice (CoP) as “groups of people who share a concern or a passion for something they do and learn how to do it better as they interact regularly” (Wenger, 1998). A primary focus is learning as social participation – that is, an individual as an active participant in the practices of social communities, and in the construction of his or her identity through these communities (Wenger, 1998). In this posting, I will seek to explain how this theory fits within the context of learning with social software, in particular, Blogs.

Blogs basically function as an online journal that can be written by one person or a group of contributors. Entries contain commentary and links to other Web sites, and multimedia (images, videos, audio) can also be included. A web log in itself is rather individual and also often personal but “when a blog is related to other blogs, they become social, and communities or networks are formed” (Daalsgard, 2006, Social Software section, ¶4). The very nature of blogging can “engender the drawing together of small virtual groupings of individuals interested in co-constructing knowledge around a common topic within a community of practice” (Boulos et al, 2006, Blogs section, ¶2). This could extend to a global community of practice. As Alexander (2006) states, the social nature of blogging means that collaboration between classes, departments, campuses, or regions is easily supported (Alexander, 2006, Projects section, ¶12).

Blogs boast a level of participation and a greater sense of community and debate is encouraged as a consequence. (Williams & Jacobs , 2004, Introduction, ¶2) The potential of blogs combined with RSS feeds and social bookmarking serves to further strengthen the community of practice. This model, according to Daalsgard (2006) serves to “facilitate closer relationships and more frequent interaction between students and teachers by their sharing of work and references and their engagement in discussions” (Daalsgard, 2006, Personal Tools section, ¶10). New patterns and connections emerge as a result, bridging the individual voices of blog authors into wider networks and communities linked by common domains and personal relationships (Wenger et al , 2005, Bridging Tools section, ¶5). The motivation to become a more central participant in a community of practice can provide a powerful incentive for learning. It appears that by “creating the learning work in a community, students become more engaged with their learning and it gains a higher status with them. They own it “ (Seitzinger , 2006, Community of Learners section, ¶3).

Distance learning has typically been viewed as isolating. However, Blogs may provide new strategies for bridging feelings of frustration and isolation by offering more engaging and interactive content and by supporting the emergence of individual voices in a distance-learning environment (Dickey , 2004, Introduction, ¶2). In a study done by Dickey (2004), it was found that “the use of blogs as a discourse tool for small group learning communities supported the emergence of community by affording students opportunities to socialize, interact and enter into dialogue, seek support and assistance, and express feelings and emotions” (Dickey, 2004, Discussion section, ¶1). Oravec (2002) states that blogs are well suited for distance learning and other educational settings "in which individuals pursue independent research yet coalesce into a learning community for certain purposes" (Oravec, 2002, Genre section ¶2). A study by Xie and Sharma (2005) found that blogs supported learning by providing different viewpoints, and they could also connect the learning content to their own experiences (Xie and Sharma, 2005, Positive Perspectives section, ¶1). This falls in line with both the community of practice, as well as constructivist, theories.

It is though, important to keep in mind that these tools were not developed for educational purposes, which means that a directed effort is necessary to develop educational social software tools to support learning activities (Daalsgard, 2006, Conclusion, ¶2). As far as a community of practice, blogging provides opportunities for students to interact in meaningful ways that extend instruction in the virtual classroom.




References

Alexander, Bryan (2006). Web 2.0: A new wave of innovation for teaching and learning?
Educause Review, 41(2). Retrieved February, 2009, from http://connect.educause.edu/Library/EDUCAUSE+Review/Web20ANewWaveofInnovation/40615

Boulos, M.N.K., Maramba, I., & Wheeler, S. (2006). Wikis, blogs and podcasts: A new generation of Web-based tools for virtual collaborative clinical practice and education. BMC Medical Education. 6(41). Retrieved February, 2009, from http://www.biomedcentral.com/content/pdf/1472-6920-6-41.pdf

Bryant, Todd (2006). Social software in Academia. Educause Quarterly.

Dalsgaard, Christian (2006). Social software: E-learning beyond learning management systems. European Journal of Open and Distance Learning. Retrieved February, 2009, from http://www.eurodl.org/materials/contrib/2006/Christian_Dalsgaard.htm

Dickey, Michele (2004). The impact of web-logs (blogs) on student perceptions of isolation and alienation in a web-based distance-learning environment. Open Learning, 19(3). Retrieved February 2009 at http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/routledg/copl/2004/00000019/00000003/art00004

Leslie, P. and Murphy, E. (2008). Post Secondary Students’ Purposes for Blogging. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 9 (3). Retrieved February 2009 from http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/560/1140

Oravec, J. (2002). Bookmarking the world: Weblog applications in education. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 45(7), 616-621. Retrieved February, 2009, from ERIC.

Seitzinger, J. (2006). Be constructive: Blogs, podcasts, and wikis as constructivist learning tools. Learning Solutions e-Magazine. Retrieved, February 2009, from
http://www.elearningguild.com/pdf/2/073106DES.pdf

Wenger,Etienne, White, Nancy, Smith, John & Rowe, Kim. Technology for Communities. CEFRIO Book Chapter 5.2. Retrieved February, 2009, from
http://technologyforcommunities.com/CEFRIO_Book_Chapter_v_5.2.pdf


Williams, Jeremy B. and Jacobs, Joanne S. (2004). Exploring the use of blogs as learning spaces in the higher education sector. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 20(2), p. 232-247. Retrieved February, 2009, from http://eprints.qut.edu.au/13066/1/13066.pdf

Xie, Y., & Sharma, P. (2005). Students’ lived experience of using weblogs in a class: An exploratory study. Retrieved February 2009 from http://eric.ed.gov/ERICDocs/data/ericdocs2sql/content_storage_01/0000019b/80/1b/a6/dc.pdf

Wikis and Social Constructivism

Social Constructivism as a learning theory stems from the work of Lev Vygotsky and Jean Piaget. The basic tenets of this theory are that students construct meaning based on their experiences and that learning is a social, collaborative activity (Palincsar, 1998, Perspectives section, ¶2). Social constructivists argue that learning takes place through the process of knowledge construction that the learning community supports (Beldarrian, 2006, p.142 ). This process is inherent with the use of wikis.

Students are, increasingly, digital content producers, and participate extensively in evolving online social networks (Alexander, 2006, Abstract). Currently, many teachers are seeking to establish interactive environments in which technology, such as Wikis, is used to support and enhance collaborative learning processes (Wheeler et al, 2008). Wikis allow users to add and edit content, and also to weigh in with their own commentary via the “Discussion” link. A good example of this is the High School Online Collaborative Writing Wiki. As suggested by Beldarrain, wikis may afford more learner control, and thus may be more effective at delivering instructional strategies that support knowledge construction (Beldarrain, 2006, Emerging Technologies section, ¶12).

Social constructivists maintain that learning should be student-centered. Wikis, in particular, actively involve learners in their own construction of knowledge (Boulos, Maramba, and Wheeler ,2006, Discussion section, ¶2). As Daalsgard notes, social software tools such as Wikis can support a social constructivist approach by providing students with personal tools and engaging them in social networks (Daalsgard, 2006, Introduction section, ¶2). There is evidence to support the belief that user-created content software in particular encourages deeper engagement with learning through the act of authoring (Wheeler et al, 2008, Introduction section, ¶1). For the students, this makes the learning process more satisfying because of the element of active engagement with others (Wheeler et al, 2008, Introduction section, ¶1). Students now see that they are not just writing for themselves and the teacher, but for a much wider audience. As Alexander (2008) states, writing for a larger, potentially global audience is “a powerful stimulus for questioning personal identity, representing oneself through writing, and understanding an audience.” There is also the added benefit that larger audiences often encourage students to be more accurate in their construction of wiki pages (Wheeler et al, 2008, Folksonomies section, ¶1).


The implementation of these newer technologies is not without issues. Doubt hangs over the concept of student created content and whether it will ever be legitimized by the traditional education establishment (Wheeler et al, 2008, Architecture of Participation section, ¶2). However, Richardson (2006) claims that "early implementations of wikis in educational settings have shown that the more autonomy teachers give to students in terms of negotiating the scope and quality of the content they are creating, the better" (Richardson, 2006, p. 65). There are no guarantees for accuracy on a wiki, although a recent survey conducted through the journal Nature found that Wikipedia is… at least as accurate as Encyclopaedia Britannica (Terdiman, 2006, cited in Wheeler,2008, Architecture of Participation section, ¶1).


In conclusion, while Wiki’s are not without certain drawbacks, mainly in regard to the user generated nature of the wiki and the potential problems associated with it. However, the use of Wikis allows students to construct their own knowledge as a result of interacting with others in their environment. Wikis can provide individual interactivity, collaborative learning, cognitive tools, authenticity, and more; all constructive learning elements. (Seitzinger, 2006, Constructive Wiki section, ¶1).

References

Alexander, Bryan (2008). Web 2.0 and Emergent Multiliteracies. Theory Into Practice, 47(2), p150-160. Retrieved February, 2009, from http://pdfserve.informaworld.com/161669_770885140_792189474.pdf

Alexander, Bryan (2006). Web 2.0: A new wave of innovation for teaching and learning?
Educause Review, 41(2). Retrieved February, 2009, from http://connect.educause.edu/Library/EDUCAUSE+Review/Web20ANewWaveofInnovation/40615

Beldarrain, Y. (2006). Distance education trends: Integrating new technologies to foster student interaction and collaboration. Distance Education, 27(2), 139-53. Retrieved February, 2009, from EBSCOhost.

Boulos, M.N.K., Maramba, I., & Wheeler, S. (2006). Wikis, blogs and podcasts: A new generation of Web based tools for virtual collaborative clinical practice and education. BMC Medical Education, 6(41). Retrieved February, 2009, from http://www.biomedcentral.com/content/pdf/1472-6920-6-41.pdf

Dalsgaard, Christian (2006). Social software: E-learning beyond learning management systems. European Journal of Open and Distance Learning. Retreived February, 2009, from http://www.eurodl.org/materials/contrib/2006/Christian_Dalsgaard.htm

Liu, Charlotte and Matthews, Robert (2005). Vygotsky’s philosophy: Constructivism and its criticisms examined. International Education Journal, 6(3), 386-399. Retrieved February, 2009, from http://ehlt.flinders.edu.au/education/iej/articles/v6n3/liu/paper.pdf

Palincsar, A.S. (1998). Social Constructivist Perspectives on Teaching and Learning. Annual Review of Psychology, 49(345-375). Retrieved February 2009 from http://arjournals.annualreviews.org/doi/abs/10.1146/annurev.psych.49.1.345

Richardson W: Blogs, Wikis, Podcasts, and Other Powerful Web Tools for Classrooms. Sage Publications Inc (USA) – Corwin Press; 2006.

Schwartz, L., Clark, S., Cossarin, M. & Rudolph, J. (2004). Educational wikis: Features and selection criteria. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 5(1). Retrieved February, 2009, from http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/163/692

Seitzinger, J. (2006). Be constructive: Blogs, podcasts, and wikis as constructivist learning tools. Learning Solutions e-Magazine. Retrieved February, 2009, from
http://www.elearningguild.com/pdf/2/073106DES.pdf

Wheeler, Steve; Yeomans, Peter; Wheeler, Dawn (2008). The good, the bad and the wiki: Evaluating student-generated content for collaborative learning. British Journal of Educational Technology, 39(6) p987-995.

Vratulis, Vetta; Dobson, Teresa M. (2008). Social Negotiations in a Wiki Environment: A Case Study with Pre-Service Teachers. Educational Media International, 45(4) p285-294. http://pdfserve.informaworld.com/645582_770885140_906807974.pdf